To shell or not to shell (was Re: URL Access Redux)
To shell or not to shell (was Re: URL Access Redux)
- Subject: To shell or not to shell (was Re: URL Access Redux)
- From: "Stockly, Ed" <email@hidden>
- Date: Mon, 22 May 2006 17:55:30 -0700
>>> If there's a proclamation that it's not appropriate for this list, or if a specific poster says it's not what they want I'll accept that, but having this debate with third-parties each time it comes up seems counterproductive.
OK, I think I complain about this more than anyone else because I'm concerned that this list is becoming more and more a list for shell scripters than for AppleScripters and that makes this list less and less hospitable to AppleScripters, especially new AppleScripters.
This list was started because the MacScripter's list became more of a Frontier list than anything else and you couldn't ask a simple AppleScript question without getting a flood of Usertalk solutions that would drown out the AppleScript answers the user was looking for.
The same thing is happening now. It's as if this list has been hijacked by shell scripting and the humble AppleScripter is barely being supported anymore. And the new AppleScripter, who's drawn to the technology by the English like syntax and the beauty of the AppleScript language and the robust interapplication technology, is bombarded by this shell scripting gibberish (at least that's what a typical shell script looks like to a typical Mac user) and nearly always pointed away from AppleScript and towards shell scripting.
I don't complain every time a shell script is mentioned, but I do complain when someone asking for AppleScript help is "force fed" shell scripting, when there are perfectly good pure AppleScript alternatives.
And, no, Shell scripts are not AppleScript. Shell script's have an incomprehensible syntax, a single command can take hours to fully master, and there are a number of different languages and syntaxes used in shell scripting so a command that works in one context (say the terminal) won't work in another (like a do shell script command, for example); there's no consistent error trapping to speak of and any user interaction must come from the AppleScript side. To call them AppleScript's simply because they can be called from an AppleScript is absurd.
I never said a listmom should ban mention of them, all I'm saying is wouldn't the MacScripter's digest be a better forum for shell scripting solutions?
At least, when you're answering a post, please consider that many AppleScripters use AppleScript because of the strength of its language, and its English like syntax, and don't criticize them for not embracing shell scripting.
I think a new scripter, trying to build a small inDesign workflow or maintain a personal website or automate his personal email, the kind of person the AppleScript language was designed for, would read through a few emails on this list and be scared away from AppleScript needlessly because a few scripters have a preference for shell scripting and believe the answer to every AppleScript problem is to have an AppleScript call a shell script.
ES
_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Applescript-users mailing list (email@hidden)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
This email sent to email@hidden